Funny thing is, the Tories are probably closer to the Democrats than they are the Republicans in terms of beliefs
Question Time & This Week
- Thread starter Liam147
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Funny thing is, the Tories are probably closer to the Democrats than they are the Republicans in terms of beliefs
I'm kind of split on this, because as a Scot I think our independence referendum was fantastic and I think in cases like that, you can end up with a portion of the population being ignored if it's beneficial for the government just to do so.
The problem, though, with David Cameron's time as PM has been that he's shown little interest in actually ruling, instead trying to secure his own position in power and satisfy the demands of voters by holding referendums he was expected to win. Naturally, it came back to bite him.
The problem with a lot of politicians is that they have no interest whatsoever in actually representing what they believe to be true, instead going for what secures them power. This was demonstrated through the Tories during Brexit where Boris backed Leave to advance his own fortunes, and May backed Remain despite leaning otherwise and is now heavily for Brexit it seems.
If Donald Trump is the one "stopping the loons running the party", you may need to kill your party.
What a thoroughly depressing hour of television
Particularly seeing as it was held in a Labour seat, with UKIP only 3000 votes back.
Congratulations to Kenneth Clarke, who becomes the sole holder tonight of having the most appearances on Question Time.
Yep. And without rehashing the Labour leadership debate it shows how dreadful the near-term future is for the left in this country, because however shit Corbyn is, there is no way Smith or Cooper or Burnham or Kendall could have tapped into that anger, against immigrants and the EU, whilst staying true to Labour values.
I don´t think you will ever get much of an population informed enough to make direct democracy ( referendums ) work and this have been the subject of both Plato and Aristotle in ancient Greece. The Societies may be different but people without proper knowledge or education can cause a lot of harm to an economy as their decision making is based mostly on feelings rather than application of logic and knowledge. A lot of people just don´t care enough to learn about economics and similar important matters on national matters. This is why the fault of the current brexit form should be blamed on David Cameron and the other utterly self serving tories like Boris Johnson. Both of these should have known way better than to play with the British economy in such circumstances as they did.
Yeah, I think leaving the EU has fecked Labour for a generation to be honest, it has no way to go.
Yeah, I'd agree with you. Direct democracy won't work, and especially not in modern times where populations are so vast. From there you arrive at Plato's ideal of a philosopher king (benevolent dictator, really). The political class are essentially philosopher kings empowered by the masses. Has its pros and cons, but a genuine direct democracy just wouldn't work. Cameron was an irresponsible child trying to quell unrest within his own party, and it backfired massively. It started as a quibble among the Tory right and ended up with Brexit.
Also, I'll be replying to that other comment tomorrow I think, a lot of things to get through there. I think I mostly agree, but it's a very ontological (in a political sense) debate.
Just take the time you need, as i kinda tent to get into such debates rather deeply as i enjoy debating and especially in debt. Though this can be very time consuming so i fully understand when people dont have the time to do it.
It's a question of priorities, and what Labour sees its role as. If working conditions, the NHS and housing are of msot importance, then take pragmatic approach about Brexit and put them first.
I think Cameron got cocky: he'd won AV with ease, and just managed to emerge okay after the Scottish referendum. The latter came closer than expected towards the end, but uncertainty helped the No vote in the end arguably. Cameron seemed to assume that'd happen again in the EU election, but ignored the extent to which older, conservative leaning (voters) turn out and often dominate British politics.
I'm not against the principle of referendums if they're just and held in ideal circumstances. The problem with Cameron's way of doing them was that he had little interest in actually arguing a case himself. In the Scottish referendum debate he regularly refused to do a one-on-one debate with Salmond, arguing it should be left to the Scottish people...but still made plenty of time to show up for appearances with selected Tory audiences. This one was much the same story - he did do that Sky News debate but notably wouldn't debate with Farage, Gove, Boris et all one on one. He was a complete coward.
But if it's Labour's belief that Brexit will inherently cause damage to the NHS and numerous other sectors of British society, how can they rightfully argue for Brexit now? It's a difficult one...the votes been made and it'd be suicidal for any party to completely and utterly argue for ignoring the vote, but the point that it was done without any clear plan for what would happen afterwards, and that the British public may have rejected a hard/soft Brexit had that been what was on the ballot is a completely legitimate one which has to be considered.
Exactly, as the Tories have been so fond of arguing over the last few years: strong public services rely on a strong economy.
What pisses me off is that we've gotten half a decade of austerity from Cameron and Osborne, with the argument that it'd pay off as the economy improved and we eliminated the deficit etc.
Now May and Hammond have come in, just about everything Osborne planned to do or was in the process of doing, seems to have been undermined or scrapped. The argument that the economy would improve looks a bit ridiculous now considering the potential predicament we're in.
I'm not sure what Labour can do here. There's just no route down which they can win. Actually getting behind Brexit and backing it would betray those voters they have who are Remainers (still the majority of them), and would potentially go against highlighting the disasters that Brexit could bring. But, the problem is, the general public seem to have little interest whenever problems with Brexit are highlighted. A fair point is dismissed as obstruction, or with not accepting the result when it's often someone just pointing out the troubles that come with.
As much as I sympathise with UK Labour on this one though, I've got feck all time for Scottish Labour on it...Dugdale out in force arguing against a second indy ref again today reminding me that Yes voters did warn Labour that all of this could happen. Different argument I know, but one that kind of gets to me.
They can't have their cake and eat it, which is a recurring complaint with Labour since 2010. There are voices on the left who see this is a huge opportunity to alter the structure of the British economy, only there is no voice for them. Most Labour MPs would rather dilute Brexit or defeat it by a thousand cuts, and maintain the status quo. What do you think the government doesn't have a mandate for in particular? The return of sovereignty like justice powers? A significant reduction in our membership fee? An end to FoM, and the ability to view all global citizens in the same way?
It's not that they don't have a mandate for any single, given power, but more the case that the referendum was on leaving or remaining within the EU, and not on the terms which would come with it.
The central, most important terms which have dominated discussion are whether we will remain a member of the single market, or whether we will end free movement from the EU, since we've pretty much been told that we cannot keep our membership while also getting rid of free movement.
That in itself is absolutely massive. And it wasn't explicitly told to the electorate before the referendum. If you'd asked a prominent Leave member as to whether we would sacrifice membership to get rid of free movement, I suspect very few of them would have committed to an answer. If you had told the British public, unequivocally, that we were, say, retaining single market membership but not getting rid of free movement, then Brexit would've almost certainly failed, and I'd say the same for the other way around.
The whole referendum in general was also slightly farcical. We have a situation where the Remain-supporting PM was touted to lead Leave, backed the other side...and yet now is a fervent Leaver. One of the most prominent figures in Boris Johnson was quite possibly a Remain supporter, or didn't give a feck either way, whose choice to support Leave was based in personal ambition as opposed to actual, genuine support. The referendum arguments, from the Tory side at least, weren't being put forward on the basis of support for either side in many prominent cases...it was done on the basis of personal ambition and what profited individual politicians the most. The same could arguably be said for Corbyn's tentative support of Remain. This was all done in a short, brief campaign, confined to a matter of months.
And now the politician leading the charge of Brexit (even though she was a Remainer...) is doing so not because she was elected to her role as PM, but because Michael Gove is an incompetent backstabber, and her eventual one-on-one opponent would've looked outdated even in the 1800s. She didn't even need to win the vote within her own party...she's just there on the basis of everyone else falling away. And we're supposed to be fine with that?
Yup I've seen that mentioned a few times recently, with inflation set to rise above earnings again, basically any benefits of the spending cuts of the last 6 years are now likely going to be swept away by all this. And to cap the pisstake, they'll be rewarded at the polls.
Nothing to add but just wanted to say this page has been full of great posts.
Boring panel tonight. That LibDem hippie woman is getting in early with her oversized, bejewelled poppy.
Loach just got owned by that guy in the audience there.
Yup, turned into a stuttering old man.
Labour guy saying saying pro airport expansion but won't back one to build up.
Asian lass has some appeal. Or passion!
Wasn't the question about Britons as people being compassionate? I think we probably give more to charities today than we ever have before.
Yeah but we've had racist attacks against Poles round here and the demonisation of benefit claimaints is worse than ever.
It's a bit of a generalised question anyway, though. Individuals are complex and society is even more so as a whole. I think society in Britain is probably a lot less community driven than what it once was, but it's easy to look back with nostalgia, and in terms of equality when it comes to race, sex and sexuality, we've probably come forward light years from where we once were...in most cases.
But the comparison was between the present day and the 1960s, which i would venture to say possessed a greater degree of racially motivated sentiment.
Yeah but come on, more people are giving clothes they don't wear any more to charity shops. That's got to be at least worth a couple of racially motivated assaults here and there.
Yeah, there weren't any racist attacks fifty years ago.
Surprised he wasn't pulled up at the start when he was complaining about how much some people earn whilst ignoring the obscene amounts of money paid in the film industry to churn out endless drivel.
If we could convince the warmongers that poverty is a country that Saudi Arabia wants to bomb seven shades of shit out of, I'm sure it would soon become a priority.
I think we're agreeing here?
I raise you one pair of skid-marked used white Calvins for a free pass to punch a foreigner.
Why have they got a cute dog there?
Sort of...maybe...it's unusual.
Individually, i don't think we are less compassionate. Equally, the most recent government which we have elected has been responsible for a harmful privatisation to the benefits sector.
Ken Loach can't comment on climate change because he sometimes uses airplanes. It was a ridiculous argument.
Also Keri Starmer was shite.
Last edited:
fecking Republican nut on.
Both Americans make me want to die soon.fecking Republican nut on.
The musician guy was okayish - I don't agree with him but he's at least neutral I suppose. The Republican guy not only endorses Trump but is supporting stuff that is outright untrue.
Javid's a fecking embarrassment, what on earth is the point on going onto the show if you're just going to say, "Nah, I don't want to give my opinion on that." Utter waste of time.
I'm a bit behind so I hadn't seen his later barb yet, he still seems very one dimensional. Other guy definitely worse. There's an a level student defending Trump now.
Have you got to the guy in the pink jumper yet?